IMPROVING STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN WRITING HORTATORY EXPOSITION TEXT BY USING FISHBONE METHOD AT THE ELEVENTH GRADE OF CLASS IPA 3 OF SMAN 4 KOTA BENGKULU - UNIB Scholar Repository

  

IMPROVING STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN WRITING HORTATORY

EXPOSITION TEXT BY USING FISHBONE METHOD AT THE

ELEVENTH GRADE OF CLASS IPA 3 OF SMAN 4 KOTA BENGKULU

  Presented As a Partial Requirement for a “Sarjana” Degree in the English

Language Education Study Program

THESIS

  

BY

RIKI AGUS SETIAWAN

A1B010011

ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

LANGUAGE AND ARTS DEPARTMENT

UNIVERSITAS BENGKULU

2014

  MOTTO

 Start with Basmallah, End with

Alhamdullilah

 Everything seems impossible until it’s done.

  

 Sometimes Later becomes Never. So, do it

now or you will regret it.

  

DEDICATION

With my greatest love and gratitude from the deepest of my heart, this thesis

is dedicated to:

  

Amdi, Randy, Ade, and all of you. Thank you. I love you

Special thanks to:

  All the EDSA members ’10, Febby, Nina,Laila, Dita, Maya, Noto, Dwi,

  Mbak Dwi as the staff at program study, thank you for your help and support. 

   All lectures in English Department, thank you for your help and support. 

  Barnabas Sembiring, M.Si., Mei Hardiah, S.S.M.A. thank you so much.

   The thesis examiners, Drs. Arasuli, M.Si., Drs. Rudi Afriazi, M.Ed., Drs.

   Anggun, Fitri, Thara, Ami, Amanda, Febby who always support and motivate me in writing this thesis.

   My truly best friends in EDSA 2010, Thara, Fitri, Deas, Ami, Dita,

   Allah SWT and my prophet Nabi Muhammad SAW. 

  thank you. I love you.

   My nieces and Nephew, Echa, Viani, Intan, Winda, Bella etc.

  Yanti, Reni and my brothers, Mujahidin, Slamet who always give all their strengths to support me. Thank you very much. I love you.

   My beloved Sisters, Wida Eliza, Yulianti, Erni Yulimah, Nun

  for all your loves, prays, and supports. I even don’t know how to repay you for everything you’ve done to me. I love you so much.

  My beloved parents, Mak, Alm. Bapak who give me life. Thanks

  Aje ng, Berti, Yudi, Nanang, Dian, Ella etc. sorry I can’t mention all of you one by one. Thank you. I love you all.

  

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

  Alhamdulillah, First of all the researcher would like to honor to Allah SWT for giving the strength and chance to finish this thesis entitled

  “Improving

Students’ Ability in Writing Hortatory Exposition Text by Using Fishbone Method

at the Eleventh Grade of Class IPA 3 of SMAN 4 Kota Bengkulu ”. This thesis is a

  classroom action research which aimed to explain how fishbone method can improve students’ ability in writing hortatory exposition text at the eleventh grade of class IPA 3 of SMAN 4 Kota Bengkulu in academic year 2013-2014. It is written to fulfill one of the requirements for

  “sarjana” degree in language teaching and learning at the English Education Study Program of Universitas Bengkulu.

  In this opportunity, the researcher would like to say thanks to people who assisted during the researcher completing this thesis. The researcher would like to say thanks to 1.

  Drs. Arasuli, M.Si., as the Supervisor and Drs. Rudi Afriazi, M,Ed. as the Co.

  Supervisor, for giving the useful supervision, guidance and constructive ideas during the process of completing this thesis.

  2. Prof. Dr. Rambat Nur Sasongko, M.Pd as the Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of UNIB for his help and support.

  3. Dra. Rosnasari Pulungan, M.A. as the Head of Language and Arts Department for her help and support.

  4. Drs. Syafrizal S., M.A. as the Head of English Education Study Program for his help and support.

  5. Dra. Hilda Puspita, M.A. as the academic supervisor thank you for your helps and supports.

  6. All the lecturers in English Education Study Program for their help and support.

  7. Mak and all of the family for their pray and support.

  8. The big family of English Department Student Association (EDSA) for being part of the researcher’s college life.

  9. And all the people that indirectly help him during the completion of this thesis. Finally, the researcher believes that this thesis is still far from perfect.

  Therefore, constructive suggestion to improve this thesis is always welcome. Hopefully, the result of this research may give a useful contribution to the development of the education in Bengkulu province.

  Bengkulu, June 2014 The researcher

  

ABSTRACT

Setiawan, Riki Agus. 2014. Improving Students’ Ability in Writing Hortatory Exposition Text at the Eleventh Grade of Class

  IPA 3 of SMAN 4 Bengkulu . Thesis. English

  Education Study Program of Languange and Art Education Department. Faculty of Teacher Training and Education of Universitas Bengkulu.

  Supervisors: (I) Drs. Arasuli, Dip. TESL, M.Si (II) Drs. Rudi Afriazi, M.Ed

  This research was a classroom action research which aimed to find out to what extent fishbone method can improve students’ ability in writing hortatory exposition text at the eleventh grade of class IPA 3 of SMAN 4 Bengkulu in academic year 2013/2014. The subject of this research was class IPA 3 which consisted of 11 males and 23 females. The instruments of this research were writing test, students’ observation checklist and field notes, teacher’s observation checklist and field notes and interview. The result of this research indicated that there was an improvement of subjects who were able to pass the standard score

  (≥70) from 35% in baseline data into 52.94% of students in the test in cycle 1 and finally became 70.58% in cycle 2. Furthermore, the result of the study showed that the teaching and learning process in the classroom became more effective. It could be concluded that there were significant improvements made by students after the implementation of fishbone method in learning writing.

  Key Words: Writing, fishbone method

  

ABSTRAK

Setiawan, Riki Agus. 2014. Improving Students’ Ability in Writing Hortatory Exposition Text at the Eleventh Grade of Class

  IPA 3 of SMAN 4 Bengkulu . Thesis. English

  Education Study Program of Languange and Art Education Department. Faculty of Teacher Training and Education of Universitas Bengkulu. Supervisors: (I) Drs. Arasuli, Dip.

  TESL, M.Si (II) Drs. Rudi Afriazi, M.Ed Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian tindakan kelas yang bertujuan untuk menjelaskan bagaimana metode fishbone dapat meningkatkan kemampuan siswa dalam menulis teks hortatory exposition di kelas XI IPA 3, SMAN 4 Bengkulu tahun ajaran 2013/2014. Subjek dari penelitian ini adalah kelas XI

  IPA 3 yang terdiri dari 11 laki- laki dan 23 perempuan. Instrumen yang digunakan adalah tes menulis, lembar observasi siswa dan catatan lapangan, lembar observasi guru dan catatan lapangan dan wawancara. Hasil dari penelitian menunjukkan adanya peningkatan dari subjek penelitan yang bisa melewati nilai standard

  (≥70) dari 35% pada data awal menjadi 52.94% siswa pada tes di siklus 1 dan kemudian menjadi 70.58% pada siklus 2. Selanjutnya, hasil dari penelitian menunjukkan bahwa proses belajar dan mengajar di dalam kelas menjadi lebih efektif. Jadi dapat disimpulkan bahwa ada peningkatan- peningkatan yang signifikan oleh siswa setelah penerapan metode fishbone dalam proses pembelajaran menulis.

  Kata Kunci: Menulis, metode fishbone

  

TABLE OF CONTENTS

COVER ....................................................................................................... i

APPROVAL .............................................................................................. ii

MOTTO ..................................................................................................... iv

DEDICATION .......................................................................................... v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ....................................................................... vi

TABLE OF CONTENT ............................................................................ ix

xii

i

LIST OF APPENDICES ........................................................................... xiv

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

  1.1 Background .................................................................... 1

  1.2 Identification of Problem ............................................... 3

  1.3 Limitation of the Problem…………......………….… ... 4

  1.4 Research questions ........................................................ 4

  1.5 The Purpose of the Research .......................................... 5

  1.6 The Significance of the Research ................................... 5

  1.7 Definition of Key Term .................................................. 5

  CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW

  2.1 Writing Ability......……………....… ............................. 6

  2.2 Steps in Writing ................…………… ......................... 7

  2.3 Kinds of English Text ………………………………… 8

  2.4 Writing an Hortatory Exposition text ............................. 12

  2.5 Brainstorming Activities ................................................ 13

  2.6 Fishbone Method ............................................................ 15

  2.7 Review of Related Studies ............................................. 17

  2.8 Conceptual Framework .................................................. 18

  CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

  3.1 Research Design ............................................................. 19

  3.2 Participant and Location of the Research ....................... 20

  3.3 Instrument of the Research…………..…….… .............. 20

  3.3.1 Test ......................................................................... 20

  3.3.2 Observation Checklist and Field notes ................... 21

  3.3.3 Interview ................................................................ 22

  3.4 Procedure of the Research ............................................ 22

  3.5 Technique of Collecting Data ....................................... 27

  3.6 Technique of Analyzing Data ....................................... 28

  3.7 Indicator of Succes ........................................................ 31

  CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION

  4.1 Process of the Research ................................................. 32

  4.1.1 Condition before the Research ............................ 32

  4.2 Results/Findings ............................................................ 33

  4.3 Discussion ...................................................................... 47

  CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

  5.1 Conclusion ..................................................................... 53

  5.2 Suggestion ...................................................................... 54

  

REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 55

APPENDICES

LIST OF PICTURES

  Picture 1. Conceptual Framework Picture 2. Kemmis and McTaggart Theory Picture 3. Pictures in Cycle 1 Picture 4. Pictures in Cycle 2 Picture 5. Pictures in Interview

  

LIST OF CHARTS

  Chart 1. Students who pass the standard score in cycle 1 and cycle 2 Chart

  2. Students’ improvement that pass the standard score before conducting the research, cycle 1 and cycle 2

  LIST OF TABLES Table 1.

  Students’ score category Table 2. Students’ score category before conducting the research Table 3. Students’ score category in cycle 1 Table 4. Students’ score category in cycle 2

LIST OF APPENDICES

  Appendix 1. Rencana Pelaksanaan Pembelajaran Cycle 1 Meeting 1, 2 dan 3 Appendix 2. Rencana Pelaksanaan Pembelajaran Cycle 2 Meeting 1, 2 dan 3 Appendix 3. Item Specification for Writing Test Appendix 4. Test Instrument in cycle 1 Appendix 5. Test Instrument in cycle 2 Appendix 6. Scoring Guide Appendix 7. Baseline Data Appendix 8. Result of Writing Test in Cycle 1 Appendix 9. Result of Writing Test in Cycle 2 Appendix 10.

  Teacher’s observation checklist and Field Notes in Cycle 1 Appendix

  11. Students’ Observation Checklist and Field Notes in Cycle 1 Appendix 12.

  Teacher’s Observation Checklist and Field Notes in Cycle 2 Appendix

  13. Students’ Observation Checklist and Field Notes in Cycle 2 Appendix 14. Interview Sheet Appendix 15. Interview to the Students after implementing fishbone method to the Students Appendix 16. Fishbone Diagram in Cycle 1 Appendix 17. Fishbone Diagram in Cycle 2 Appendix 18.

  Students’ worksheets in cycle 1 scored by researcher and collaborator Appendix 19.

  Students’ worksheets in cycle 2 scored by researcher and collaborator Appendix 20. Surat Izin Penelitian Appendix 21. Surat Keterangan Selesai Penelitian Appendix 22. Surat Keterangan Bebas Plagiat Appendix 23. Pictures in Cycle 1 Appendix 24. Pictures in Cycle 2 Appendix 25. Pictures in Interview

  

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

  English has four basic skills which should be mastered by the learners. In the process of teaching and learning English, students’ ability in mastering the four language skills becomes an important goal. Those skills involve receptive skills; listening skill and reading skill, and productive skills; speaking skill and writing skill. It means that, those skills encourage the students to produce a written or spoken work.

  Prabhakar (2012) said that writing is important to express, judge, explain, and record. That quotation shows that writing is one of the important ways to express people’s thoughts and to communicate their ideas. They will write if they want to express something in their minds. The forms of their written expressions are novels, short stories, biographies, and even personal diaries. So, writing is included in productive skill.

  In writing skills, Senior High School Students should master some text genres. One of the genres is hortatory exposition. Hortatory exposition text is one of the argumentative texts. It is a text that elaborates the writer‘s idea about the surrounding phenomenon.

  There are many problems in writing hortatory exposition text that come from students. Based on preliminary data given by the teacher, it was found that 65% of eleventh grade of class IPA 3 of SMA N 4 Kota Bengkulu were bad in writing hortatory exposition text.

  According to the interview with the teacher, there are some general problems which influence students’ ability in writing such as the difficulties to organize ideas, their intention in writing, and lack of technique in writing english text.The teacher said that when they were asked to write an hortatory exposition text, they know what they want to write but they cannot organize their ideas. In addition, they w ere not motivated with the teacher’s method that was used in classroom. Besides, they were not active in the classroom. Based on those problems, the researcher will try to solve by using fishbone diagram.

  Fishbone method is a kind of method that uses cause and effect diagram by Kaoru Ishikawa. It is a kind of diagram. It is called a fishbone diagram because the shape of this diagram like a bone of fish. A fishbone diagram consists of three part. First, the head as a problem or topic which will be analyzed. Second, the body as a description of a problem or topic. Last, the tail as a result of the problem. Ishikawa created the technique using a diagram-based approach for thinking through all of the possible causes of a problem. This technique helps people to carry out one problem through analysis of the situation. This technique will show the causes of a particular effect and the relationships between cause and effect. Garvey (2008) argued fishbone diagram can help to construct some factors that associated with a particular topic and show how they can relate together. So that, this technique is appropriate to use in writing hortatory exposition text because hortatory exposition text is one of the argumentative texts.

  According to Agustine (2011) a hortatory exposition is a type of spoken or written text that explains the reader or listener what should or should not happen. The generic structure of this text is 1. Thesis 2. Arguments 3. Recommendation. First, thesis means as an introduction of the text. The writer explains the issue in thesis. Second, arguments mean the writer will explain from some aspects to support or oppose the issue. Last, recommendation means the writer gives an opinion about the issue whether it should or should not happen. In other words, the topic of this text is the effect and the arguments as the causes of the effect.

  Fishbone method had been applied by Subaedah (2011) in her research entitled “Improving the Students’ Writing Skills through Fishbone Method (a classroom action research in class XI of SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Bontoala, Makassar). Two cycles had been conducted in her research, and the result was fishbone method could increase the students’ writing skill. It was also applied by Shan Li (2011) in her research entitled “Improving the Quality of Proposal for Science and Technology Program through Using Fishbone Analysis.” It also used two cycles and the result is fishbone analysis could improve the quality of proposal for science and technology program.

  Based on explanation above, the researcher wants to do a research entitled “Improving Students’ Ability in Writing Hortatory Exposition Text by Using Fishbone Method at class II IPA 3 of SMA N 4 Kota Bengkulu

  .”

1.2. Identification of the problem

  Based on the background of the problem above, the researcher identified several problems which were:

  1. Students got difficulties to organize their ideas.

  2. Students were not motivated in writing hortatory exposition text, even though the teacher had explained how to write a hortatory exposition text.

  3. Students were not active in the classroom.

  1.3. Limitation of the problem

  Based on the problems above, the researcher limited the problem into the students’ ability in writing hortatory exposition text at class II IPA 3 of SMA N 4 Kota Bengkulu and focused on the method that could be used to solve the problems.

  1.4. Research Questions

  Based on the statement of the problem, this research questions were formulated as follow:

  1. To what extent can fishbone method improve students’ ability in writing hortatory exposition text at class II IPA 3 of SMA N 4 Kota Bengkulu?

  1.5.Purpose of the research

  Based on the research questions, the purpose of this research was to find out what extent fishbone method can improve the students writing ability in hortatory exposition text.

  1.6. Significance of the research

  The significances of this research were for the teacher and the students. For the teacher, this research shows to the teacher how fishbone method can improve the students’ ability in writing hortatory exposition text. For the students, this research shows to the students that fishbone method can improve their ability in writing hortatory exposition text. Then for further researcher is expected to use learning log strategy not only to improve writing but also to improve other skills.

1.7. Definition of key terms

  Key terms according to the research are taken from context and variables on the research title. The key terms are :

1. Writing ability is students’ ability to communicate message in written form.

  2. hortatory exposition text is a text that elaborates the writer‘s idea about the surrounding phenomenon.

  3. Fishbone method is a kind of method that used cause and effect diagram. It is a visual illustration that clearly shows the relationship between a topic and factors related to the topic. The shape of the diagram looks like the skeleton of fish. The bones of the fish represent factors that have been combined to form categories.

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. Writing Ability Writing ability is one of the abilities that students should master in learning English. It means that, if the students are successful in delivering their message in

  written form, they will have good writing abiity. Ur (1992) said that writing purpose is to express the writer’s ideas and communicate the message, and the ideas itself are the most important point in writing.

  Writing is a complex process because it consists of complex activities. Alamargot and Lucile (2001) said that writing activities need cooperation and collaboration in people mental activities, so that writing becomes a complex task for people. In writing, people must plan the topic clearly, organize the ideas, choose the good vocabulary, considere the right grammar and revise what they have written.

  According to Harris in Agustine (2012) there are 5 components in writing, (1) content of the substance of writing, (2) form; the organization of content, (3) grammar; the employment of grammar form of syntactic pattern, (4) style; the choice of structure and lexicon items to give a particular tone, (5) mechanic; the use of convention of the language. Those all components should be mastered by the writer in order to improve their writing.

2.2. Steps in Writing

  As a complex activities, writing consists of many steps. Hogue (2008) said that there are four components of writing process, first is prewriting, second is writing the first draft, third is editing the first draft, and the last is final writing.

  Prewriting is an activity when the students show their ideas in prewriting techniques. The forms of prewriting techniques are listing forms, brainstorms, and the other forms. This activity will help them in showing many ideas related to the students’ topic. It also has an important role to help the students to go to the next steps.

  The next step is writing the first draft. Writing the first draft is a process when the students write the text in draft form. It based on their ideas in prewriting process. In this process the students will write a text without worrying about some terms like right vocabulary and the unity and coherence.

  Next is editing the first draft. Editing the first draft is a process when the students will edit their writing. In this activity, they will look over the text that they have been written. They will delete the unimportant informations of the text, the wrong grammar, and the bad choosing of vocabulary. They will also added some informations that importants to add in their text.

  The last step is final writing. Final writing is an activity when the students check the elements that should be written in their text. They will cross unimportant sentence, add some important informations, and check the coherence of the text.

2.3. Kinds of English Text There are some kinds of English text subject in Senior High School.

  According to Anderson and Anderson (1997) there are some kinds of English text. They are narrative, recount, descriptive, spoof, explanation, procedure, news item, discussion, exposition.

  First, narrative text tells a story from a particular point of view. Hyland (2009) argued that narratives are generally imaginative but can be based on real events. Its purpose is to narrate events, entertain and engage the reader in an imaginative experience. It may includes fairy stories, mysteries, science fiction, romances, horror stories, adventure stories, fables, myths and legends, historical narratives, ballads, slice of life, personal experience.

  The generic structure of narrative text contains an orientation, a complication, a resolution, and a coda/reorientation. An orientation sets scene and introduces the characters. Then, a complication describes events that lead to a problem. Next, a resolution is where the complication is resolved. Last, a coda/reorientation ties up loose ends but it is an optional.

  Second is recount text. Anwar et al (2005:95) states recount is a report of events or activity in the past. The purpose of a recount text is to list and describe past experiences by retelling events in the order in which they happened (chronological order). There is no complication among the participants and that differentiates from narrative.

  The generic structure of a recount text consists of an orientation, events, and re-orientation. In orientation, the writer introduces the participants and explains the setting of the story. Then, the writer describes series of events that happened in the past. The last, reorientation is where the writer states personal comment of a story. It is an optional.

  Third one is spoof text. Spoof is a text which tells factual story, happened in the past time with unpredictable and funny ending. Its social function is to entertain and share the story. The generic structure of a spoof text concludes an orientation, events, and twist. Twist is the most interesting part in a spoof text. It is a climax paragraph which contains some unpredictable sentences. It is usually an anomaly language which is famous in society.

  Fourth is descriptive text. Descriptive text is a kind of text with a purpose to give information. Stanley (1988) mentioned that description presents the appearance of things that occupy space, whether they are objects, people, buildings or cities. The context of this kind of text is the description of particular thing, animal, person, or others. The generic structure of a descriptive text contains identification and description.

  Identification is where the writer identifies a topic to be described. Then, the description is where the writer describes the qualities, parts, and characteristics of the topic.

  Fifth is procedure text. Procedure text is a text that is designed to describe how something is achieved through a sequence of actions or steps. It explains how people perform different processes in a sequence of steps. This text uses simple present tense, often imperative sentences. It also uses the temporal conjunction such as first, second, then, next, finally, etc.

  The generic structure of a procedure text consists of goal, materials, and steps. Goal is to show the purpose or the aim of the text.

  Then, Material is a part to describe the materials which are needed. Last, Step is a part where the writer describes the process to achieve the purpose.

  Sixth one is news item. A news item text is a text which is grouped into the text genre of narration. It is a text which contains about news is categorized as news item text. This text supplies the readers, listeners or viewers the up to date about events or information which are considered newsworthy or important hottest issue of the day since media like news papers are published daily. The main function of narration is telling stories or informing about events in chronological order. The order in the narration can be based of time, place and the events them selves.

  The generic structures of News Item text are:  Newsworthy Event It tells the main event which is considered newsworthy in a summary form.

   Background Event It elaborates what happened or tell the detail information or what causes the incident. It can include the background, participant, time, and place relating to the news.

   Sources

  It contains original comments which can be formed by the participants, the official authorities or experts in the events.

  Seventh is explanation text. Explanation is a text which tells processes relating to forming of natural, social, scientific and cultural phenomena. Explanation text is to say ‘why’ and ‘how’ of the forming of the phenomena. It is often found in science, geography and history text books.

  There are two parts of generic structures in this text. First, a general statement states the topic that will be discussed. Last, the sequenced explanation states the series of steps which explain the topic.

  Eight one is discussion text. Discussion is a text which presents a problematic discourse. According to Walker and John (2001) a discussion is used to look at more than one side of an issue. Discussion is commonly found in philosophical, historic, and social text. Discussion is used to support ideas presented in sequence to justify a particular stand or viewpoint that a writer is taking.

  Generic structure of discussion:

• Statement of issue (stating the issue which is to be discussed)
• List of supporting points (presenting the point in supporting the presented issue)
• List of contrastive point (presenting other points which disagree to the supporting point)
• Recommendation (stating the writer’s recommendation of the discourse)

  The last one is exposition text. According to Walker and John (2001) an exposition argues for or against a certain point of view based on a certain topic. It is a well-structured argument or persuasion. The point of view must be supported by facts and relevant information on that topic. Expositions can be used to persuade other people to share the writer’s point of view. They can also be used to share the wri ter’s point of view on a certain topic that may have two (or more) distinct sides.

  There are three parts of Exposition text structure which are an introductory statement, a series of arguments, and a conclusion. An introductory statement presents the write r’s point of view and previews the arguments to be presented. Then, a series of arguments aim to persuade the reader

• – new paragraph for each new argument. Next, a conclusion sums up arguments and reinforces writer’s point of view.

2.4. Writing an hortatory exposition text

  Hortatory exposition text is one of the texts that students learn in English subject. In this text the writer will show his arguments based on specified topics.

  It consists of cause and effect. Coffin (2004) said that a hortatory exposition text is a text which puts forward a point of view and recommends a course of action. It means that hortatory starts from a controversial issue then it is explored by some perspectives before reaching a position and giving recommendation in the end of the text.

  According to Doddie et all (2008) hortatory exposition is a kind of text which has a function to persuade the listener that something should or should not be the case. This text is divided into three parts, first is thesis or introduction, second is argument or body of the text, and the last is recommendation. In introduction, the writer will introduce the topic and indicating the writer’s position. In arguments, the writer will give some arguments to support or oppose the writer topic. The last is recommendation. Recommendation is where the writer gives opinions about the text which should or should not be the case.

  In writing hortatory exposition text, there are many problems that come from students. When they were asked to write a hortatory exposition text, they feel confused to choose the topic for the text. Moreover, hortatory exposition text is closely related to writer’s arguments. Some students feel difficult to arrange the arguments and to make the ideas do not jump. They know what they want to write but they cannot organize their ideas. Besides that, they were bored with the teacher’s method that used in classroom. The method that used by the teacher just make them confused in writing hortatory exposition text. Because of that, they need an appropriate method to improve their ability in choosing the topic and organize their ideas in hortatory exposition text.

2.5. Brainstorming Activities

  There are some brainstorming activities in teaching writing so that the teaching and learning process in the classroom will be effective and attractive. They are peer editing, mind mapping, round table, learning log, and fishbone diagram.

  First, Peer editing strategy is the strategy that uses the classmate as an editing of the students‟ writing. It is also peers activity for the students in giving reaction each other in their writing. Hill (2011:2) stated that an important mode of feedback is the reaction of peers. It means that the students will give their feedback through their peer editing. It will make the students more confident in writing.

  There are three steps of peer editing. Step 1 is Pre-Training stage, here the students must involve more in this stage. Step 2 is while peer editing stage. Here the students try to give their peer editing each other and the teacher will be moving around in order to see the students‟ task. And the last is post peer editing stage, here the teacher will help the students in their peer editing so the students can ask the teacher about their difficulty.

  Second, Mind mapping is the strategy in using mapping to organize the writing. The students will explain their topic into detail in mapping. It can help the students in organizing their writing well. Riswanto and Putra (2012:62) said that mind mapping (or concept mapping) involves writing down a central idea and thinking up new and related ideas which radiate out from the center. It means that mind mapping will involve the central idea in writing.

  Third, Round table strategy is one of the strategies in teaching writing. This strategy will help the students in brainstorming the ideas.

  The student will be in group then sit around the table. They will write their idea about the topic one by one, that is why this strategy can help the students in brainstorming or gathering the ideas. Kagan (2009) stated that round table strategy is the activity of the students in taking turn on writing response or problem solving in their team.

  Fourth, Learning log strategy is the strategy in teaching students in the class by using log or the questions about what they learn in learning English in the class or a reflective view of their achievement. Commander and Brenda (1996) found that a learning log is a written record of students' perceptions of how and what they are learning as well as a record of student s‟ growth and learning over time.

2.6. Fishbone Method

  Fishbone method is a kind of method that uses cause and effect diagram. This method uses a diagram-based approach for thinking through all of the possible causes of a problem. This method helps people to carry out one problem through analysis of the situation. It will show the causes of a particular effect and the relationships between cause and effect.

  Garvey (2008) argued fishbone method can help to construct some factors that associated with a particular topic and show how they can relate together. This method is appropriate to use in writing hortatory exposition text because hortatory exposition text is one of the argumentative texts. It consists of thesis as an introduction, arguments as the body of the text, and recommendation as a conclusion. In other words, the topic of this text is the effect and the arguments as the causes of the effect.

  Gupta (2007) said that fishbone method is a method that used cause ‐and‐effect diagram. It can be used to identify the potential (or actual) cause for a performance problem. Fishbone diagrams provide a structure for a gro up’s discussion around the potential causes of the problem. It also used to illustrate and communicate the relationship among several potential or actual causes of a performance problem.

  Gupta (2007) said that there are some advantages of using fishbone method. They are:

  1. The fishbone method used fishbone diagrams permit a thoughtful analysis to avoids any possible root causes for a need.

  2. The fishbone technique is easy to implement and creates an easy‐to‐un derstand visual representation of the causes, categories of causes, an the need.

  3. By using a fishbone diagram, the students are able to focus on the group on the possible causes or factos influencing the problem or need.

  4. Even after the need has been addressed, the fishbone diagram shows many areas of weaknesses that can be revised before the causing more difficulties.

  Garvey (2008) argued that there are four steps in implemented fishbone method. They are as followed:

  1. Identify the main problem that will become the main topic of hortatory exposition text.

  2. Identify the main factors that caused the problem.

  3. List the sub problems in each main factors.

  4. Analyze the diagram and write the text based on the diagram.

  Gupta (2007) argued that there are general procedures in applying fishbone diagram:

  1. Identify gaps between the results that are required for the successful accomplishment of your topic result chain.

  2. sure that

  Generate a clear, concise statement of the needs.make everyone in the group agrees with the need as it is stated.

  3. Identify the categories of causes of the need. Brainstorming is often an effective technique for identifying the categories of causes.

  Gupta (2007) gave some tips to success in using fishbone method. He said that, make sure that there is consensus in the group about both the “need” and the characteristics of the “cause statementʺ before beginning the process of building the fishbone diagram. If appropriate, the students can graft branches that do not contain a lot of information onto other branches. Likewise, they can

  ʺsplitʺ branches that have too much information into two or more branches. Write the simple words while populating the fishbone diagram or use as many words as necessary to describe the cause or effect.

2.7. Review of Related Studies

  Fishbone method had been applied by Subaedah (2011) in her research entitled “Improving the Students’ Writing Skills through Fishbone Method (a classroom action research in class XI sepeda motor of SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Bontoala, Makassar). Two cycles had been conducted in her research, and the result, fishbone method could increase the students’ writing skill. And it also applied by Shan Li (2011) i n her research entitled “Improving the Quality of Proposal for Science and Technology Program through Using Fishbone Analysis.” It also used two cycles and the result is fishbone analysis could improve the quality of proposal for science and technology program.

2.8. Conceptual Framework

  Conceptual framework of this research can be seen as following : Students get difficulties in writing hortatory

  Problem exposition text Problem

  Fishbone method solving Giving fishbone Cause and effect Writing hortatory graphs analysis exposition text

  Cycle(s) Expected

  Improvement of the Students’ Ability in Writing result Hortatory Exposition Text

  Picture 1. Conceptual Framework

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1. Research Design

  The design of this research was a classroom action research. This research was conducted to solve learning and teaching problem by using fishbone method.

  Fisher (2006) said that action research is a kind of activity that focus on specific problem. It was an activity which has purpose to improve the participants’ ability.

  It also involved systematic observations and data collection which was used by the researcher to develop more effective classroom strategies. So that, to get the data and information needed, the researcher did the research in the classroom. The research became a study at the eleventh grade of class IPA 3 of SMA N 4 Kota Bengkulu.

  There were some steps in action research. Kemmis and McTaggart in Koshy (2005) said that the steps in action research can be seen as following :

  Picture 2. Kemmis and McTaggart in Koshy (2005)

  3.2. Participants and Location of the Research

  The participants of the research were the eleventh grade of class IPA 3 students of SMA N 4 Kota Bengkulu in academic year 2014/2015. The participants were 34 students consist of 11 male students and 23 female students. The age of the students were around 17 years old. This researcher was helped by the English teacher at class II IPA 3 of SMA N 4 Kota Bengkulu as the collaborator. She taught the English subject at the eleventh grade of class IPA 3 of SMA N 4 Kota Bengkulu. It meant that she knew about the real situation at the eleventh grade of class IPA 3 and also the condition of the students that had many problems in writing especially in writing hortatory exposition text. The location of this research was SMA N 4 Kota Bengkulu in Jl. Zainul Arifin.

  3.3. Instrument of the Research

  In collecting the data of the research, the researcher used several instruments such as students’ writing test, observation checklist and fieldnotes, and interview.

1. Students’ writing test

  Students’ writing test was given to the students at the end of the cycle after fishbone method applied to the students.

  The students’ writing test was conducted as a way to know the problem of the students in writing hortatory exposition text and also to knew whether fishbone method was successful or not to improve the students’ ability in writing hortatory exposition text. The test was done by asking the students to write a hortatory exposition text. They had to follow the generic structure and language features of a hortatory exposition text. To ensure the realibility of the score, there were two raters, the researcher and collaborator.